Announcements
New Discussions
Things to do and not to do flying a spin
by pknapp66. 10/20/19 05:25 PM
Cleaning corner castings
by extremebias. 10/18/19 04:18 PM
New England 100 2019: 30th Anniversary!!!
by brucat. 10/18/19 02:19 PM
What are EPO rudders?
by chevy43. 10/17/19 01:37 AM
NASCA 5.5 covers, where to buy?
by Damon Linkous. 10/07/19 06:05 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 5 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234746
07/12/11 02:24 PM
07/12/11 02:24 PM
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,968
B
brucat Offline
Carpal Tunnel
brucat  Offline
Carpal Tunnel
B

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,968
Gotta agree with Ding here.

Mark, I too agree that judgement needs to be applied, but that is primarily needed when the rules are UNclear.

From the USSAILING website: One of the main training points for judges is to: "1.Interpret the RRS and other rules as they are written, not as you think they should be written or as it was intended that they be written."

To simplify this (a bit)...

In the Tornado example, there was no rule excluding the material, but there was a fairness issue. In this case, a judgement call was needed to EXCLUDE the material.

In the F18 example, there is a list of what IS allowed, everything else is NOT allowed. In my opinion, judgement about "it's sort of similar" has no place at the table. Fairness should never have entered the discussion, it was an illegal material, period.

Mike

-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234748
07/12/11 02:40 PM
07/12/11 02:40 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Matt M Offline
addict
Matt M  Offline
addict

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Originally Posted by David Ingram
Mark this isn't the first equipment related issue... remember the Shockwave? I wanted a clear and decisive message sent then but in my opinion the class fell short (that is just my opinion as a class member not the chair). So, to see yet another equipment related issue pop up for the second year in a row makes me uneasy. I see this issue as a trend as opposed to an isolated incident.


The F18 class has set itself up as 1 of if not the premier 2 up racing cat class. This means that there will be more and more pressure to “develop” advantages for racing, like it or not. Some of these attempts will be within the current rule set and many will push the boundaries, or even show up as cases of “cheating” whether by design or accident.

The class rules in the F18 were purposely written to be restrictive with the stated intent it would prevent cost escalations and equalize the racing. These are rules written with great intent, but it can be argued rather easily they can provide a false sense of security and can even be proved the opposite effect and make things more expensive.

Any open formula class is going to involve development. The costs for new models, sail developments etc are significant and will be transferred in 1 way or the other to the buyers of these boats. While there are a lot of benefits in getting better and faster boats over time, the costs are there. In many instances creating “development” and marketing model changes in a very restrictive environment adds more expense than in an open architecture. The class may not want it, but the builders and suppliers live off of selling an advantage.

If a certain material does not show up on the approved materials list, this does not mean that a material necessarily is more expensive than the ones listed. New building materials could provide better and cheaper boats in theory. The Shockwave instance is a great example where the rule did nothing to protect the class or racing integrity, but can be argued hurt the class. (at least hurt people who were involved in the class and adding to the class) These builders used a locally produced and supplied structurally equivalent material that happened to not be on the approved list. Meanwhile the core materials listed as approved by the class have gone through at least 5 process and material changes, so they other than the brand name barely represent a fixed reference point of equality.

Yes if it is written down it has to be followed or the favoritism issue etc will become rampant. Over documentation and specification though is society wide problem. The $500 hammer cost that much because some guy in a room wrote a specification that when followed made the hammer cost that much to produce.

Before the trolls fire off here; I am not in favor or against the F18 rules here and only refer to it because it is an F18 thread. This is bash on rules in general. One would like to think the world capable of operating under the catch-all of "the spirit of the rule" or fairness or whatever, but somebody somewhere s going to show up and F it up everytime.

Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234749
07/12/11 02:46 PM
07/12/11 02:46 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,116
Annapolis, MD
Mark Schneider Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mark Schneider  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,116
Annapolis, MD
I understand... The real world is a B tch and the integrity issues can come up. But it does not mean that your integrity is corrupted either.

Again, If the sail material would be approved after the regatta...What is the just decision?

No doubt...sorting out illegal from legal.. Fair from unfair and just from unjust in a restricted development class involving the top class sailors could lead to very different outcomes based on what you value.

Legal vs Illegal?... Not Legal!... It is a technical violation of the material approval rule.

Fair vs Unfair? ... So long as all sailmakers COULD have built a technically illegal sail and anyone could have gotten one from this or any other sailmaker.... Probably Fair on the Race course in this limited development class.

Just or un-Just?.. generally god gets to do the justice thing... but I support a just decision by the class to ignore the technical failure to get prior approval.

I certainly see your point and have a lot of sympathy..
(Your state's jury just did the just versus legal thing with that bimbo in the child murder trial)


crac.sailregattas.com
Re: sail material control [Re: brucat] #234750
07/12/11 02:59 PM
07/12/11 02:59 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,116
Annapolis, MD
Mark Schneider Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mark Schneider  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,116
Annapolis, MD
Quote
n this case, a judgement call was needed to EXCLUDE the material.


Ah (for the record).... but this could not be done... no rules on material... or the principal that everyone should be able to purchase the raw materials... using Unobtainium was not illegal. So... anything goes! The loophole resulted in a non level playing field in my view... ISAF could just grit their teeth and learn the lesson for the next time.

Fortunately, the F18 class has learned a lot from the T experience.... I don't see the F18 sail material issue as cheating (like I did the T's)

Legal? Fair? Just? Hell of a debate!

Last edited by Mark Schneider; 07/12/11 03:15 PM.

crac.sailregattas.com
Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234751
07/12/11 03:29 PM
07/12/11 03:29 PM
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 806
Toronto, Ontario
pitchpoledave Offline
old hand
pitchpoledave  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 806
Toronto, Ontario
David totally agree with you. The rules must be followed in the strictest sense.

Re: sail material control [Re: Mark Schneider] #234752
07/12/11 03:29 PM
07/12/11 03:29 PM
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 302
Daytona Beach Florida
O
orphan Offline
enthusiast
orphan  Offline
enthusiast
O

Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 302
Daytona Beach Florida
What was the sailmakers reason for using the material? Did they say?

Re: sail material control [Re: Matt M] #234756
07/12/11 03:43 PM
07/12/11 03:43 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,906
Clermont, FL, USA
David Ingram Offline
Carpal Tunnel
David Ingram  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,906
Clermont, FL, USA
Originally Posted by Matt M

If a certain material does not show up on the approved materials list, this does not mean that a material necessarily is more expensive than the ones listed. New building materials could provide better and cheaper boats in theory. The Shockwave instance is a great example where the rule did nothing to protect the class or racing integrity, but can be argued hurt the class. (at least hurt people who were involved in the class and adding to the class) These builders used a locally produced and supplied structurally equivalent material that happened to not be on the approved list. Meanwhile the core materials listed as approved by the class have gone through at least 5 process and material changes, so they other than the brand name barely represent a fixed reference point of equality.


Yeah that whole, the supplier was right down the road and it's cheaper so it's okay excuse 1 - is NOT the point and 2 - Why couldn't the builder have come to the class and petitioned for the material to be added? WHAT'S THE BIG FREAKING DEAL!? If the Shockwave would not have been holed at Worlds last year would the builder have come to the class...ever!? In fact PVC is stated as being cheaper and stiffer in comparison to the approved core materials, so again the builders that are playing by the rules are punished and those skirting the rules are rewarded (until they get busted). Still not happy with how that one played out.

Matt, you're a builder/supplier so naturally you will have a bias to a more relaxed rule environment. Which is another reason why I'm not totally comfortable with builders and sail makers on the F18 technical committee, it's a bit like having the foxes in the hen house.


David Ingram
F18 USA 242
http://www.solarwind.solar

"Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda
"Excuses are the tools of the weak and incompetent" - Two sista's I overheard in the hall
"You don't have to be a brain surgeon to be a complete idiot, but it helps"
Re: sail material control [Re: orphan] #234758
07/12/11 03:47 PM
07/12/11 03:47 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,906
Clermont, FL, USA
David Ingram Offline
Carpal Tunnel
David Ingram  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 3,906
Clermont, FL, USA
Originally Posted by orphan
What was the sailmakers reason for using the material? Did they say?


Because it offered absolutely no advantage to the currently approved materials... and was cheaper. I totally made that up, but how much do you want to bet...


David Ingram
F18 USA 242
http://www.solarwind.solar

"Do or do not. There is no try." - Yoda
"Excuses are the tools of the weak and incompetent" - Two sista's I overheard in the hall
"You don't have to be a brain surgeon to be a complete idiot, but it helps"
Re: sail material control [Re: Mark Schneider] #234760
07/12/11 04:21 PM
07/12/11 04:21 PM
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,222
Roanoke Island ,N.C.
Team_Cat_Fever Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Team_Cat_Fever  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,222
Roanoke Island ,N.C.
Originally Posted by Mark Schneider


Again, If the sail material would be approved after the regatta...What is the just decision?



I think that's pretty obvious . It was illegal at the regatta (unapproved)and it will be legal after it is approved. Cut and dry, it was illegal during Worlds, don't care who used it.


"I said, now, I said ,pay attention boy!"

The cure for anything is salt water - sweat, tears, or the sea
Isak Dinesen
If a man is to be obsessed by something.... I suppose a boat is as good as anything... perhaps a bit better than most.
E. B. White
Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234761
07/12/11 04:31 PM
07/12/11 04:31 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,021
Australia
macca Offline
old hand
macca  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,021
Australia
The sails in question were made of an approved cloth, the only issue was that there was some stickyback cloth applied at the tack and clew of the sails that was not on the list.

The cloth is cheaper than the approved ones and there was no performance gain or any other advantage in using the cloth.


________________________
http://aus300.blogspot.com
Re: sail material control [Re: macca] #234763
07/12/11 05:02 PM
07/12/11 05:02 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
F-18 5150 Offline
veteran
F-18 5150  Offline
veteran

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
My questions,
1 Did the sail maker petition to have this sail cloth approved before the worlds?
2 Did the sail maker build these sails and distrubute them before applying for approval?

I agree that the rules were broken and the scores should not count. Maybe next year someone shows up with painted Carbon spars and just says but they were available a close in price. No body would have known had I not snapped my mast.


Richard Vilvens
Brand Ambassador
PSA Capricorn USA
R.Vilvens@yahoo.com
Fairfield, Ca
F-18 5150

http://www.capricornsailing.com/
Re: sail material control [Re: David Ingram] #234764
07/12/11 05:02 PM
07/12/11 05:02 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Matt M Offline
addict
Matt M  Offline
addict

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 548
MERRITTISLAND, FL
Originally Posted by David Ingram
Matt, you're a builder/supplier so naturally you will have a bias to a more relaxed rule environment. Which is another reason why I'm not totally comfortable with builders and sail makers on the F18 technical committee, it's a bit like having the foxes in the hen house.



It’s not a builder thing with me, I hate over specifying anything. I deal with this every day, where some rule writer felt they needed to be so thorough as to cover every eventuality; they totally missed the point of the rule in the first place.

There was a lot more behind the curtain relative to the Shockwave story, but he was wrong to not research first and at least submit a request. That is the rules and they are written, so have to be followed – I get it; no problem.

A better example is the current life jacket issue in the US. Yes we should require life jackets. But somebody felt they needed to be thorough, so they just could not end with “life Jackets will be worn” they had to include more words and they could not just say “certified” but had to go into even more detail on who’s type and cert would be followed. Now the more common brands for cat friendly vests are all CE branded and technically now illegal for use in many US events due to the over use of words.

Too many laws, too many rules and most are conflicting or useless. That’s my soap box issue of the day.

Tomorrow – Insurance
Day after – Stop lights

Re: sail material control [Re: Matt M] #234765
07/12/11 05:07 PM
07/12/11 05:07 PM
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,118
Northfield Mn
Karl_Brogger Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Karl_Brogger  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,118
Northfield Mn
When are you going to tackle nuclear proliferation?


I'm boatless.
Re: sail material control [Re: Karl_Brogger] #234766
07/12/11 05:19 PM
07/12/11 05:19 PM
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
pgp Offline
Carpal Tunnel
pgp  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,525
Have some?

Attached Files
popcorn.JPG (242 downloads)

Pete Pollard
Blade 702

'When you have a lot of things to do, it's best to get your nap out of the way first.

Re: sail material control [Re: Karl_Brogger] #234767
07/12/11 05:20 PM
07/12/11 05:20 PM
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 613
New Hampshire, USA
windswept Offline
addict
windswept  Offline
addict

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 613
New Hampshire, USA
I am not an F-18 sailor but have read through this thread. Could someone explain to me what the Shockwave issue was and what sailcloth was used without class approval?

thanks,


Tom Siders
A-Cat USA-79
Tornado US775
Re: sail material control [Re: windswept] #234769
07/12/11 06:13 PM
07/12/11 06:13 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
F-18 5150 Offline
veteran
F-18 5150  Offline
veteran

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
Shockwave issue was an unapproved core material.
The sail cloth issue was an unapproved material used in sail construction of the Sail Innovation sails used by some of the teams.

From what Macca said it sounds like the reinforcement cloth used int the sails were not on the list of approved materials. I thought it was the spin material but I was not there so im just guessing.


Richard Vilvens
Brand Ambassador
PSA Capricorn USA
R.Vilvens@yahoo.com
Fairfield, Ca
F-18 5150

http://www.capricornsailing.com/
Re: sail material control [Re: F-18 5150] #234771
07/12/11 06:21 PM
07/12/11 06:21 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
F-18 5150 Offline
veteran
F-18 5150  Offline
veteran

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
F18 rules

D.3 HULL SHELLS
D.3.1 MATERIALS
(a) The hull shells shall be built from polyester or vinylester resin, glass
fibres, core of PVC or balsa or felt. The combination of wood-epoxy,
injected plastic, which shall not be altered, other than locally for fittings,
and passage of equipment and normal reinforcement. Epoxy glue is
permitted for joining components. Every material that is not expressly
permitted is prohibited.

Since the world there's some rumorous about shockwave..

Shockwave core is Corecell.
Corecell isn't PVC or balsa or felt
So Corecell is prohibited in F18 rules.
Corecell marketing is that it is a better alternative to PVC.


Richard Vilvens
Brand Ambassador
PSA Capricorn USA
R.Vilvens@yahoo.com
Fairfield, Ca
F-18 5150

http://www.capricornsailing.com/
Re: sail material control [Re: F-18 5150] #234773
07/12/11 06:38 PM
07/12/11 06:38 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
F-18 5150 Offline
veteran
F-18 5150  Offline
veteran

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,430
california
5th place boat filed a request for clarification. (Not a Protest) against.
Second
Ninth
Tenth
Twenty Eight.
Along with several other boats cited.

From Tony on page 6 http://db.tt/Q84gMyV


Last edited by hobie18rich; 07/12/11 06:39 PM.

Richard Vilvens
Brand Ambassador
PSA Capricorn USA
R.Vilvens@yahoo.com
Fairfield, Ca
F-18 5150

http://www.capricornsailing.com/
Re: sail material control [Re: F-18 5150] #234780
07/13/11 04:12 AM
07/13/11 04:12 AM
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,669
Melbourne, Australia
Tornado_ALIVE Offline
Pooh-Bah
Tornado_ALIVE  Offline
Pooh-Bah

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,669
Melbourne, Australia
Quote

G.3.2 MATERIALS
(a) The ply fibres shall consist only of polyester materials as detailed in the Mainsail Sailcloth Appendix.


Quote
(c) Sail reinforcement shall comply with Mainsail Sailcloth Appendix.


Black and white. If it is not on the list it is illegal. Does not matter how cheap or expensive, fast or slow it is.

If a sail maker wants to build and F18 sail and supply it to a customer as one, they need to understand the rules from measurment to material specs.

If a class measurer is measuring in the sails, he needs to also understand and follow these rules.

If a sail cloth provider wants their material to be elegibale for F18 sail production, they must seek approval from the F18 class.

Do you really need to make it even more simple than this?


Re: sail material control [Re: Tornado_ALIVE] #234781
07/13/11 05:07 AM
07/13/11 05:07 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,021
Australia
macca Offline
old hand
macca  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,021
Australia
It's never that simple...

Not one of the boats at the worlds had sails that complied with the class rules.

So why pick on one sailmaker for a trivial issue when the rest of the fleet was in breach as well?

That's the bigger issue here.


________________________
http://aus300.blogspot.com
Page 5 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Moderated by  Damon Linkous 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 33 guests, and 73 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
extremebias, Isotope776, stewartgood, Trampolines, certid
7970 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
brucat 2
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,368
Posts266,940
Members7,970
Most Online1,650
Sep 10th, 2019
--Advertisement--
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1